First, watch the below video. Note Senator Bunning's agreement with Zero Hedge on who the proposed head of the Fed should be (i.e., John Taylor). But that's irrelevant. What is - at 5:40 Bunning says that "Geithner will be fired by the President for his inability to handle his job as Secretary of the Treasury." True. What is even more relevant, and hints at a potential smoking gun, begins at 8:00 "[Bernanke's] staff did not agree with him [on bailing out AIG]...I am talking about an email that he sent his staff, after his staff recommended that the Federal Reserve not touch AIG, just like Lehman Brothers."

Ok fine, so Bernanke steamrolled opposition: that's nothing new - whoever thought the Fed is any more democratic than the country it is supposed to serve, surely is naive. Here is HuffPo's Ryan Grim on the matter:

A Republican senator said Tuesday that documents showing Federal
Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernake covered up the fact that his staff
recommended he not bailout AIG are being kept from the public. And a
House Republican charged that a whistleblower had alerted Congress to
specific documents provide "troubling details" of Bernanke's role in
the AIG bailout.

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), a Bernanke critic, said on CNBC that he
has seen documents showing that Bernanke overruled such a
recommendation. If that's the case, it raises questions about whether
bailing out AIG was actually necessary, and what Bernanke's motives
were.

And as we type, Harry Reid has noted that he wants to get a reconfirmation vote on Bernanke on Thursday - presumably before all the rot that will soon be uncovered about yet another Bernanke fiasco is made public. Hopefully the man who owns roughly $3 million in commercial real estate and is thus a direct beneficiary of a Bernanke reconfirmation, has done his math on senatorial support. A key question however is: shouldn't the debt ceiling issue be resolved first - after all the fact that our national debt "ceiling" is nothing but a joke these days, is a direct consequence of Fed policies to pile bail out upon bail out. It also leaves the question open of what additional information has to still be presented. Back to HuffPo:

Senators will be voting on Bernanke's confirmation for a second term in
the coming days. But only senators on the Banking Committee have had
access to documents that illuminate just what decisions he made and how
he made them. And that access only came after Bunning publicly
complained that Dodd and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) were the only
members of the committee could see them.

Darrell Issa identifies the specific documents that need to be disclosed (see below) and has requested from Edolphus Towns that these be made public, as the "Board's staff did not return calls" in an attempt to procure these documents directly.

The take home message: the Fed has finally produced a whistleblower. Could this be the catalytic event that brings the house of cards down.

One only wonders at this point how deep the rabbit hole runs: if one declassified document confirms that recent testimonies by various bankers and Head of Treasury Departments may have bordered on perjury, one can only imagine the impact of not only the 250,000 pages of AIG docs already in Commission possession are released for crowdsourced analysis, but also what would happen if there is finally disclosure around the second bailout of AIG in February of 2009, which as we have repeatedly noted, was an even closer call for AIG bankruptcy than before. Oddly, with Goldman having no more risk exposure to AIG whatsoever then, courtesy of ML III, the insurer was still not allowed to fail. The question remains - why?

Obama would be very wise to start reassessing his propensity to go with these "all in" bets. This one is "all in" due to the fact that as recently as this weekend, Obama gave Bernanke his "strongest support" and the Fedgate scandal has been well underway.

I almost feel sorry for the pathetic dupe; a true scion of affirmative-action. All that time rising up through the ranks without nary an ounce of expended effort. Always protected by a group of enablers and fixers to ensure the next step up. (See both state senate and Senator campaigns.)

Imagine being admitted to Harvard law without achieving any undergraduate distinctions and/or honors? Imagine being commonly known as Barry Dunham in high school, yet no one seems to care nor notice that he adopted some weird ass radical name later on in life?

The best part of being the ultimate dunce is that he seems to actually believe his shit. Boy, I can only imagine the dossier from the scouts who were checking out the next-gen talent for the PTB: a narcissist who will never see it coming.

If being black is such a special advantage, would you prefer to appear black or white when interviewing for a job or being on trial in front of a jury? How do the white people you know behave? Do they tend to bend over themselves to hire and advance black people or do they disdain them and prefer not to have black people around?

What were W's grades? Why did he get rejected by Texas law school get into Havard Bschool?

I went to HS school with a bunch of Vietnamese kids that went by nick names like Willy and Frank but in adult life they all go by their given, ethnic names. I guess this normal progression shows some sort huge character flaw in these kids and means they can not be trusted with any political office.

Does Bernanke and Geitner and Paulson suck because they are white? Was Mozillo at Countrywide a slimy fraudster because he was too tan? Did Fred Raines suck at Fannie because he was black and Godly Blackfien suck at Goldman Sacs cause he was white?

Only someone with serious racial inadequacy issues can take an article about new revelations about what Geithner and Bernanke were up to when they engineered the AIG bailout heist, can turn that into a racist diatribe about the president.

Take a deep breath and get concerned about something real, like how we might expose criminals in Obama's administration rather than what nick name he used in high school and how Obama's arrival on political stage and failings are due to his race.

You are correct also - or whatever I could get out of that as cynical statements meant to lead to some point... I'm not sure why thinking Barry is Evil somehow means we think the other guy is not Evil?...

In any case, you are correct as well and both evaluations of these assholes is accurate - one being correct does not automatically make the other incorrect - even if most sheeple (yep, we're STILLLLLL using that term...) think that a (love for one) = (hate for the other) and vice versa...

For the record - to answer your questions...depends. Currently, I would rather be black...and if you can make me a woman AND black...well then we'll have something...most white people I know only have a problem with punks, thungs, and drug-addled 20-somethings...some punks are black, some are white. But when I've got a cop behind me at 3am...well I still wish I was black, because if I can get him to treat me badly, I can claim it was racially motivated and get millions of our TARP money back...

...W's grades were slightly better then John Kerry's. W got into Hahvehd the way most of these morons do - Dad.

I went to HS with a bunch of Pakistanis and they all used their real names.

There wasn't anything racial in that OP for you to get so defensive about...standard pres-bashing. No one said "Liberal's hate people with Downs syndrome" when they called Bush retarded...all these guys got a cushy ride to where they are...some knew they were going to get the explosive charges put in their neck, and other didn't...and it's funny when they didn't so we all laugh.

As I read B9's post, I slowly nodded. Like W before him, Clinton before him, and GHWB before him, Obama is sadly underqualified to lead anything and thus makes a perfect dupe. Bill had Hillary to make decisions, W had Cheney, who, as the consummate insider for the MIC, is nothing less than evil incarnate, and GHWB was an internationalist from the word go and had a lot to do with marginalizing Reagan's small-government populism. GHWB's thousand points of light are going to turn out to be torches in the distance, and the number "thousand" doesn't adequately describe them.

I recently attended a AA hockey game where the home crowd has an interesting tradition: as the names of the visiting team are announced, after each one the announcer pauses and the crowd yells "Sucks!", and at the end, after the coach's name, they shout "He sucks too, they all suck!" This is the reaction I have when I watch television and see politicians, with very few exceptions.

In Obama's case, his race made him the perfect vehicle for implementing a very extreme and rapid agenda: takeover the last vestiges of the economy and implement a full-blown command economy. Charge "Racism!" when opposition surfaces, and ride political correctness to victory.

It almost worked, didn't it? Obama is a know-nothing, done-nothing, accomplished nothing, unskilled but pretty mouthpiece, and that is all. The WH is filled with old school insiders, just like W's WH, and the agenda hasn't changed one tiny little bit, it has only been accellerated. War, or more war? Socialism, or more socialism? Internationalism, or more internationalism? Wall Street, or Wall Street?

All that remains is for Obama to utter the words "they hate us for our freedoms".

Huh? The date of the whistleblower's doc is Sept 15 *2008*. How exactly will Ben Bernanke's cover-up during the Bush Administration get Obama impeached? You must be quite a successful quant. Or maybe your handle should be DumbassTrader.

The republicans will drive this home? Doubt it, but hope you are right.

I have hope some Repubs and Dems will drive this home, but it won't be the Wall Street sellout congresspeople, establishment Repubs are not exactly FED haters.

Hard to make this just stick to Obama as W was into these guys just as much with Paulson and Bernanke. If they could limit the stink to just Obama, they might take out Bernanke, but there would be too much collateral damage.

There are lots of turds in that rabbit hole and the light of day is starting to creep in.

My, oh, my, isn't there going to be a lot of egg on the faces of those Senators moving to the "yes" for Bernanke column when the ugly truth comes out?

And, to those Senators who may try in the near future the old "gee, I had NOOOOOOOOO idea about this" crap, forget it; it's not going to work because the whole Fed, AIG, Goldman charade is starting to unravel big time and the truth is working its way to the surface.

Does anybody know if Reid filed the cloture motion today? I failed to call his office today and cannot find any info on the intertubes. Remember folks, once the cloture is filed it has to age and the vote can be taken 2 calendar days from the filing.

It sure looks like someone (that would be you Barack Obama) is really trying to jam this one home soon. That notion of "...no idea about alleged Fed irregularities" applies to you as well Mr. President. In fact, with all the legitimate questions and reasonable suspicion of inappropriate Fed activity currently being discussed...

HOW IN THE HELL COULD ANYBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND REAPPOINT SOMEONE UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES??"

please excuse the caps locks, I so rarely ever use them. People are certainly welcome to debate over Bernanke's policies, but the failure to press for answers to the alarming questions raised about Fed activities to date while issuing "strongest support" for a person in the midst of it simply DEFIES COMMON SENSE.

yeah it sucks... i was sitting on cash recently but looks like it is time to buy up commodities... even if Ben wants to tank stocks to paint a good face on the dollar for tbills, it cant last past the spring

+1 - there is political gold in the form of popular support to exposing and attacking these criminals and yet most congress people dare not go there...can only be their masters are tightening the leash.

We are so ripe for a flase flag it's stunning. It would have to be a big one for them to get away with it over the "false flag!" cries from the Internet. GB is the example I use as an illustration of an advanced western control state. No liberty to be found running around loose.

got this from a friend nagging casey to ditch ben...i love how he calls him Dr.

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about Ben Bernanke's nomination for a second term as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.

Dr. Bernanke's first term as Chairman of the Federal Reserve ends on January 31, 2010. Due to his unique knowledge and performance steering the economy out of a deep recession, President Obama nominated the Chairman for a second term. Subsequently, the Senate Banking Committee voted 16-7 to clear Dr. Bernanke for consideration by the full Senate. I understand there are concerns about Dr. Bernanke's role in the economic downturn and subsequent recovery. Please be assured that I will keep these questions in mind as Dr. Bernanke's confirmation comes before the Senate for a vote.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my web site, http://casey.senate.gov. I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

The quality, content & context of the product being produced in the face of a rapidly evolving or devolving situation is truly something to behold... Good to see you and I trust all is well with you and yours. Peace

Everyone surely knows that this "ramming thru" crap with cloture today and the vote on Thursday is exactly why the Dems lost Massachussetts, aside from just a really bad attempt at health care reform of course.

Fellow ZH'ers, take note who votes "yes" for Bernanke, and throw everything (including the kitchen sink) at them from now until November 2.

I seriously doubt that Bernanke or Geithner would ever bring up any of this to Obama - doesn't make sense. This would have been something kept within the Fed, and not allowed to leave its walls. At that stage, Bernanke couldn't afford to have Obama say "no" or know about it (regarding the Feb '09 events).

WHEREAS, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America authorizes Congress "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures";

WHEREAS, on December 23rd, 1913 the US Congress enacted the Federal Reserve System;

WHEREAS, the Federal Reserve System is considered an independent agency within the federal government, with oversight of Congress and containing appointed public officials on its board of directors;

WHEREAS, the Federal Reserve System Controls the Federal Reserve Note, the official currency of the great nation of the United States of America;

WHEREAS, there may be controversies regarding the legality and constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System, it is recognized that the said system has operated continuously as the central banking system of the United States since the inception of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913;

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States of America granted Congress the authority to create the current Federal Reserve System, it also does grant Congress the authority to modify or revoke the Federal Reserve System;

WHEREAS, the actions of the Fedreral Reserve System represent the credit and currency of the United Stated of America to the citizens of this great nation and to the world;

WHEREAS, the Federal Reserve System, acting independently within the federal government allowed, supported, and even promoted parasitical and non-productive uses of the money and credit of the United States of America;

WHEREAS, the United States and likely the entire world's financial system is undergoing massive de-leveraging of the said parasitical and non-productive uses of the credit and money of the United States of America (as well as other nations' currencies);

WHEREAS, the US dollar, the "Federal Reserve Note" is declining in value due to these parasitical activites, as well as potentially other causes;

WHEREAS, it is recognized that the citizens of the United States and other nations did willingly participate at some level in the creation and propogation of said parasitical activities;

WHEREAS, it is also recognized that the United States of America, a sovereign nation, has the legal, moral, and God given authority to take actions to benefit its citizens and to protect its good name, credit and money in times of difficulty;

WHEREAS, it is recognized that the current time is such a time of great difficulty;

WHEREAS, it is recognized the parasitical financial institutions and their activities are at odds with citizens of the United States of America and the good credit and money thereof;

WHEREAS, the current indications are that the Federal Reserve System is acting to preserve the financial system currently flooded with the parasitical activities;

WHEREAS, the current indications are that the neither the Federal Reserve System, nor the Congress of the United States, nor the people of the United States have access to the books of the institutions being preserved by the Federal Reserve, and therefor the degree of inter-connectivity and risk associated with the institutions and other entities cannot be determined;

WHEREAS, the Federal Reserve System is accepting non-performing assets as collateral for credit with ultimate taxpayer responibility to entities not under its legislative mandate;

IT MUST BE CONCLUDED, that the Federal Reserve System is not acting to the benefit of the people of the United States of America, its credit, money, and good name;

WHEREAS, it is recognized that the political will and capability of the government of the United States of America may not be up to the task of prosecuting this proclamation ; It is also recognized that this may be the only hope for the continued survival of the United States of America as the great nation as it has historically existed.

NOW THEREFORE, it is PROCLAIMED by those supporting this Proclamation that the Congress of the United States of America FULLY NATIONALIZE the Federal Reserve System, and take full control of the credit and money of our great nation; The Congress must take whatever action necessary to seperate out, sequester, disown, or otherwise neutralize the effect of the parasitical financial activities which led to the current crisis; The Congress of the United States of America must reorganize, replace, or terminate the Federal Reserve System as appropriate; or otherwise devise a system for creation of the national currency.

IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED, that the Congress of the United States of America in cooperation with the Executive of the United States of America contact allied nations and any other nation willing to participate in the overhaul of the failing and parastical financial sytem currently in operation and create new treaties and alliances as necessary to create a sane and productive system of finance with the express goal of supporting a productive national, and by extension and through voluntary cooperation, world economy;

FURTHERMORE, it is PROCLAIMED that it should be the goal of such an international effort to maintain fair international trading practices allowing for protection in national interest of labor, resources, and productive capabilities;

WHEREAS, it is recognized that such a move on the part of the United States of America may result in the necessity of an isolationist policy IF the other developed nations do not follow our lead; If such occurs, so be it.

Lots of ugliness, lies, fraud, etc. bubbling up to the surface. People are going to get caught.

on a personal note, I'm glad Obama has the brains to at least not try to cut money from Veteran's Affairs. It makes me sick when they try to phuck over the people who risked their lives and became disabled through their service.

Thanks. The angry person that makes up a part of me wonders if the banks are such a necessary part of our national security then why don't we pay them like we pay the folks that are actually getting shot at? Especially since their compensation is heavily dependent upon government assistance? After all, how many industries in our country are truly free of the government faith based, tax manipulating dole? Hell of a conflicted place for a small government person to find himself. Regardless, thank you. Now I just wish the VA would learn how to properly clean their equipment so they would stop giving vets hepatitis and HIV from dirty 'scopes.... Gotta save those extra $10.00 bucks a patient so the regional director can get a bigger bonus and make folks like me wanna skip diagnostic care so I can just die quicker and save 'em even more. Besides, our nation needs the money for those who actually earn it, like the aforementioned masters of the universe. One day folks will learn a secret far worse than the agent orange story. Too bad I will probably miss its revelation.

Relative to AIG, an interesting note I read on a blag today stated that AIG is a holding company, and AIGFP was the unit pressing CDOs (duh). Of interest is that the other units of AIG were all solvent and operating profitably. There was no reason to bail out one insolvent unit (AIGFP) which represented less than Lehman, and by accounts, would not have been a problematic unwind to the AIGFP counterparties - painful, perhaps, but not world-ending, as FRBNY claims.

It seems that the TBTF claim relative to AIG is a red herring! If true, I presume the 250,000 pages of disclosed documents will have a discussion of just this fact. Let's crowdsource-analyze that puppy! I'll take pages 159,000-159,999.

Why?
Does anyone recall that the European+British Banking system was one week away from complete shutdown (spend a few hours contemplating the blowback if that came to pass).

P.S. GS, with all the access to details, knew that their ultimate safety net was being on the same side as the foreign banks... thus they bet the proverbial farm every which way with zero possibility of "moral hazard".

Oddly, with Goldman having no more risk exposure to AIG whatsoever then, courtesy of ML III, the insurer was still not allowed to fail. The question remains - why?

I am sure the folks at ZH have a far better grasp of this answer than I do. However, I strongly suspect that the root of the answer can be found in the rationalization/s for the first lifeline. If the first bailout was to protect GS, other firms and most importantly, the reputation of Hank Paulson then to give up and let that baby burn would have been a glaring tell tale. Beyond that I would look at the condition of AIG subs and the communications from them to their state regulators and between their regulators and various federal officials for texture. I would also look to how the subs condition was fairing under various stress scenarios for deterioration of their holdings of various real estate products and the penchant AIG has for playing round robin swap between these subs to meet various state regulatory standards for safety & soundness. In this I believe the Vermont, Pennsylvania & California Insurance Commissioners offices and the subs that operate in those states may be a good place to begin digging...

A sole proprietor structural engineer acquaintance of mine said that during the Sept meltdown his E&O insurance rep called him and told him that due to the financial situation his insurance premiums were going to double. Then the day after the AIG bailout, insurance rep calls and tells him...no, don't worry, we are not raising you rates. If the subs were solvent and independent on holding AIG, why did this happen? I think the states could be a very good place to look, some states have real public servants that are actually trying to protect the population from predators.

And the ripples upon the pond of serenity indicate that many at the state level, both in the public & private sectors have been stomped on harder and longer than anything we have heard publicly thus far. Just as the case with some state mortgage & banking regulators that attempted to stop the bubble, only to be trashed by the feds. Especially the federal reserve and the comptroller of the currency. Conscience is a powerful motivator and if properly approached and managed I am sure there is quality 411 aplenty just waiting for someone to care enough to ask for it.....

There had been discussion elsewhere about nine months to a year ago concerning requirements AIG placed on their subs back in 2005 or so if memory serves in which the parent stipulated that all of the resources available to the sub were at the disposal of the parent to meet its obligations regardless of state requirements. This conflict was not noticed by the states until the collapse and the whisper has been how federal authorities used a very heavy hand to squelch state concerns and wrapped them up under a national security letter..... I am sure that there is fertile ground to be found in some of these offices.

So, we, finally, have a Dr. Jeffrey Wigand in the Treserve. And all this while I was wondering where all the Wigands of this country have gone. Now, the only hope is nobody goes Mike Wallace and CBS 60 Minutes on the whistleblower.

i think bunning's premonition about geithner are valid and correct....in other words geithner has a bullseye on his head....

whether blobama needs a scape goat or needs to roll tax cheater under the bus to save his own butt is somewhat immaterial....

both bernanke and geithner are criminals....on the other hand i would like to know if bernanke was taking orders to bail out aig or if he was doing this under his own ministrations....

someone theorized about aig being the conduit for foreign bailouts...we know that it was a conduit for goldman sachs' bailout and i suspect that it was a money launderer for other banks as well....i smell bcci in the air..

hmmm. No fan of the current administration am I. However, the first AIG bailout came in 2008 before the election and months before the inauguration of Obama. The AIG bailouts started with the prior administration as did the nationalization of Fannie & Freddie. Truly it matters not the party when both of them will do whatever the federal reserve and its member institutions want. Anything. The only truly nonpartisan activity in WDC is politicians & regulators lining up to kiss these folks asses.

Unless of course I am misinformed. If I am please provide me with links to your sources that indicate Obama was president in 2008 or somehow forced then president Bush to make Obama the decider a few months early... After all, I know Bush and the republican congress were major proponents of big government health care programs. (Remember the trillions of dollars given away under MEDICARE Part D back in 2003?) Oh, and please include some solid information as to how much of the health insurance pie AIG writes and carries since AIG's stock does not move like Aetna's or Humana's when there is news regarding health insurance issues.

Someone should get this over to the "mainstream" media ASAP. The rest of the world needs to know this is going down. Bloomberg perhaps? The latest they have is: Bernanke Gains Backers as Reid Sets Procedural Vote (Update1) Jan. 26 (Bloomberg)

Does anyone else remember the initial hearing to renominate Bernanke and how Bunning had to press for this? As I sit here typing this, I'm watching Frontline right now listening as Dodd talks about how he has taken on the credit card industry even as he took 7 million in campaign contributions from them. Shelby speaks about how powerful the lobby industry is even as the Supreme Court has increased their power exponentially.

The financial services industry spends millions of dollars lobbying members of Congress, especially those sitting on the powerful Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, which writes the rules governing banks and lenders.

As lawmakers wrangled over landmark financial reforms, including credit card legislation and mortgage regulation, the American Bankers Association spent $6,876,000 lobbying Congress in the first nine months of this year.

Beyond lobbying, the industry pours millions of dollars into campaign contributions for members of the Banking Committee. Overall, members received more than $34 million from companies and individuals doing business in securities, investments, insurance, commercial banking, finance, credit, credit unions and savings and loans, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. (This figure does not include money from mortgage companies such as Countrywide Financial.)

Other findings from the filings from the last election cycle include:

- The American Bankers Association gave donations to the campaigns and leadership Political Action Committees (PACs) of two-thirds of Senate Banking Committee members in the last election cycle. Donations ranged from $7,500 to over $50,000.

- Nearly every member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee accepted campaign donations from the financial services industry in the last election cycle -- most took more than $100,000.

- Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and their employees together donated more than $1.6 million to committee members.

- Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the committee, leads the pack with more than $8 million in industry donations to his campaign committee and leadership PAC in the last election cycle. Citigroup and its employees were his single largest donor, giving nearly $340,000.

- Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) was a distant second behind Dodd, receiving nearly $3 million from the financial services industry. Goldman Sachs and its employees were his single largest donor, giving more than $220,000 in the last election cycle.

- Only one member of the committee has passed on taking industry donations -- Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), who is independently wealthy from his family-owned business, Kohl's grocery and department stores, and his ownership of the Milwaukee Bucks. Kohl's worth is estimated at $234 million according to Roll Call, a Washington D.C.-based newspaper covering the U.S. Congress.

Obama has been on some kind of losing streak, no Olympics for Chicago, major winter storm in Copenhagen,cap and tax bill is toast, governorships go to repubs in NJ, VA, and Teddy's healthcare bill gets kicked to the curb by a repub/indy taking over his Teddy's seat in MA.

Amazing that the AIG issue just won't go away. The whole issue regarding bonuses being paid to AIG execs was a red herring back in the spring and summer. Meanwhile, Paulson inserts a Goldman man (Liddy) in AIG, and pays $13 billion to Goldman and others. If I heard one more time how he was only getting paid $1 per year, I think I would have puked. Meanwhile. GS stock went from $40 to $180, mission accomplished.

Thank God there are some Senators like Bunning and Reps like Issa in congress. Bunning should kick McConnell in the crotch next time he sees him.

Google AIG and CIA.
what do insurance companies have access to? lots of peoples financial information all over the world. AIG had a very large presence in China if I am not mistaken. CIA wouldnt want to lose all of its information connections would it? No, AIG would not be allowed to fail. Would be interesting to hear others view on this.

God this pisses me off. We shouldn't have bailed out AIG but if we didn't bail out AIG it would have sunk Goldman Sachs. You think Goldman would have survived on Buffets piddling 5 billion? No they needed the 20 billion bet to be paid from AIG. End of the reasons. Goldman would have sunk a new investment firm based on lehman and other displaced people would have it and the Government Sachs monopoly would have been broken.

long-time (if you can call it that yet) reader, new member. just did my part and forwarded this to drudge. would be nothing quite like an all caps red headline complete with a blinking siren on the drudge report to jump-start getting the word out on this to the masses.

this site really is a non-linear advance from anything out there in financial journalism.